Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes-09-29-80-Adjourned Regular Meeting66, 6 C MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 29, 1980 The City Council of the City of Downey held an adjourned regular meeting at 4:30 p.m., September 29, 1980, in the Green Room of the Downey Community Theatre, Mayor Theodore H. Jackman presiding. PRESENT: Council Members: Lyell 11. Swearingen ' Milton R. Mackaig Mayor Pro Tem James T. Quinn Robert G. Cormack Theodore H. Jackman Mayor ALSO PRESENT: John H. Saunders, Acting City Manager William A. Goggin, City Planner Harry Payson, Acting Building Official Tom Matuk, Code Enforcement Officer Thomas Tincher, Housing & Redevelopment Coordinator Robert L. Shand, City Clerk -Treasurer Study Session regarding the Sign Ordinance. Councilman Mackaia referred to a list of ten points for consideration if changes are to he made in the Sign Ordinance. He is definitely opposed to the Ordinance as it is now written. Councilman Quinn said he has studied the staff recommendations and thinks they have taken the right steps forward. But, he thinks the Council should expand on the recommendations. Councilman Quinn referred to the staff letter of August 20th concerning suggested changes to Section 9148 of the Downey Municipal Code copies of which were distributed. Councilman Cormack feels there will be no freedom until guidelines are set. Mayor Jackman stated a condition exists today on the Sign Ordinance because the Council granted to one person what necessarily should not have been granted. Councilman Swearingen feels guidelines are necessary, and they should come from the City Council. Mr. Goggin explained that if the Code is to be changed, the changes should be sent to the Planning Commission for consideration and public hearing. The changes will then be studied and sent back to the Council with recommendations. The Council then proceeded to review each requested change in the Sign Ordinance, one at a time. Section 9148.6(a) - Abandoned Signs: Councilman Swearingen prefers a one-year time limit to remedy a sign problem. Mr. William Cole, General Manager of the Downey Chamber of Commerce, spoke re- garding a meeting held September 16th by a committee of six persons to provide alternatives for items the Chamber had opposed in November, 1977. He proceeded to read for discussion the items of change proposed for the Sign Ordinance. A copy of the Chamber's letter was distributed to the Council, and a copy is on file in the office of the City Clerk. Mayor Jackman preferred to first discuss the Ordinance changes desired by the Council prior to reviewing the list prepared by the Chamber committee. Section 9148.08(c) - Flashing Signs: Councilman Swearingen feels the signs should be restricted as to distances but not outlawed completely. Section 9148.08(f). Councilman Swearingen favors allowing signs on the sides and rear walls of buildings to identify places of business. A discussion was held regarding the Country Butcher located on Paramount Boulevard and the entire building. Section 9148.08(n) - Statuary Signs: Councilman Swearingen feels the signs should be computed in square footage available to the building, such as allowing the sign on a building to be smaller. Council Minutes 9/29/80 (adj.) -1- CG 6/ Section 9148.10(a)(3) - window Signs: Councilman Swearingen feels this should be changed from the present 20 percent to 30 percent and allow three small signs. Mayor Jackman pointed out there are many ordinances on the books, 90 percent of which are not enforced unless a complaint arises. The City could not hire enough people to enforce all the ordinances. Mr. Goggin explained enforcement of the Code is improving in view of the City now having a prosecuting attorney. Section 9148.14(d)(1)(i) - Freestanding Signs: Councilman Swearingen feels 150 feet is unrealistic for pole signs, and pole signs should be available for any lot. Section 9148.16(a): Councilman Swearingen said signs for outdoor automotive sales should be 1-1/2 square feet to each lineal foot of building frontage. Section 9148.16(f) - Shopping Centers: Discussion was held regarding the Stonewood Shopping Center area and sign. Mr. Goggin said the subject of square footage is now under consideration. Section 9148.20(b)(2) & (3) - Dirty Signs: A discussion was held regarding unkempt signs. Section 9148.08(i) - Flags, Banners, Pennants: Councilman Mackaig would like to see the City allow automobile dealers to use flags, etc., as a temporary sign similar to signs used on windows for the same purpose. Section 9148.14(c) - Door Signs: Mr. Goggin explained the purpose of this section is to allow for signs on doors to stairways (upstairs) for businesses that do not have anv other means of advertising by window display. Councilman Mackaig commented on Sections 9148.14(a), 9148.20, and 9148.26(c)(iii). Discussion followed regarding policy for replacement of signs. Councilman Quinn thinks that two signs, one foot by three feet would suffice for window space sign coverage to identify a product. A discussion was held regarding various signs now being used by businesses in the City and freestanding signs. It was pointed out that freestanding signs are limited to three activities which may be placed on front of the building. Councilman Mackaig noted the use of signs in generating subliminal buying. Councilman Quinn's main concern is control of window signs on the front of buildings and proper signing on the rear and side of buildings. Mr. Cole explained recommendations for changes in the Sign Ordinance as pro- posed by the Chamber of Commerce volunteer committee. Councilman Swearingen requested a review of Section 9148.26 - Morals. Mr. Goggin explained this Section restricts the use of obscene words in ad- vertising. A final decision would remain up to the court if ever challenged. However, the City would have made an effort to prevent such situations from occurring. Mr. Cole suggested perhaps a public meeting could be conducted by the City to acquaint citizens with the Sign Ordinance and methods of effective signing. It was moved by Councilman Cormack, seconded by Councilman Quinn, and passed by unanimous vote to send the Sign Ordinance suggestions and recommendations to the Planning Commission for study. Mayor Jackman declared a recess from 6:15 p.m. to 6:20 p.m. The meeting resumed with all Council Members present. Mr. Tincher rendered a report on status of the Housing & Community Develop- ment Block Grant Program, explaining how, in the past, the City has set forth its goals and priorities with HUD representatives, including a budget that has been adopted in each of the five years Downey has been in the program. He also reviewed the Housing Assistance Plan which explains the various needs of the handicapped, elderly, small and large sized families. Mr. Tincher commented on the method of determining whether there is a given number of elderly households Council Minutes 9/29/80 (adj ) -2- v;' L' (ice" in need of rental assistance or requiring rehabilitation assistance, and whether , there is a need for new construction. This criteria establishes the annual pro- gram and funds, which are then distributed to the cities choosing to participate in the program. Downey has placed its participation upon a rehabilitation program in view of limited space for new construction. Mr. Tincher pointed out HUD has raised questions regarding Downey's rehabilitation approach and has indicated there is a need in Downey for new construction for low and moderate income families. HUD is also requiring Downey to develop a strategy for addressing new construction needs of the elderly, handicapped, small and large families. Mr. Tincher referred to the conditions HUD has placed on the City's applica- tion this year, which he said must be met if Downey wishes to continue taking advantage of the $1 mlllion a year that is available. He noted condition 3 is of particular interest to Downey, in that it specifies the construction of 40 dwellings under Section 8 "Notices of Funding Availability." The notices are dispatched to all developers in the area. Mr. Bob Stern of Goldrich, Kest, & Stern Development & Real Estate Management Company, explained the notification process. Councilman Cormack inquired if notices were sent to individual developers. Mr. Tincher replied HUD uses the newspaper ads as a means of notification. Mr. Stern said the notices are published in the same manner as ordinances. Mavor Jackman asked if any site is available for 40 units within the City. Mr. Tincher replied there is space in Subarea B or. Nance Street east of Woodruff Avenue. Mayor Jackman inquired regarding the consequences if Downey does not want HUD money. Mr. Tincher stated the City would lose $1 million a year. He also explained the City is participating in the existing Section 8 program, wherein eligible per- sons who qualify as low or moderate income residents pay no more than 25 percent of their income for rent. Mr. Tincher pointed out Mr. Stern was the only representative who responded and presented a proposal for 40 units on the Nance Street site. HUD is currently reviewing the proposal, although he noted the proposal lacks a commitment from the City to make the land available to Mr. Stern. During discussion regarding the Section 8 Program list of qualified persons, Mr. Saunders said a majority of the list consists of Downey residents. However, he noted there is no guarantee the list can be limited to Downey residents. Mr. Stern proceeded to explain how the Section 8 Housing Assistance Program functions for the developers. Mayor Jackman feels the City should administer its Section 8 Program, rather than the County. Councilman Swearingen asked if developers in Downey had been contacted regard- ing existence of the Section 8 Program. Mr. Tincher said letters have been sent out to members of the Downey Board of Realtors and all financial institutions in Downey. He would like to have a work session with these people to explain what possibilities exist. Mr. Stern explained how HUD prefers the cities to follow the housing program. He noted some cities have declined to remain in the program. Discussion followed. Mayor. Jackman asked what is necessary to obtain the City's 1982 grant? Mr. Stern explained the City will have to comply with HUD rules and regulations over the next five years if the low cost housing program is accepted. Also, persons displaced by the I-105 Freeway will figure in on the volume of necessary low cost units. Mayor Jackman requested Mr. Tincher to give him a report on the I-105 Freeway situation. Council Minutes 9/29/80 (adj.) -3- Following discussion of Federal funding programs, it was moved by Councilman Swearingen and seconded by Councilman Mackaig to deny the Housing Community Development Program. (See amendment to motion.) Councilman Cormack suggested amending the motion to send the package back to HUD. Councilman Mackaig suggested Mr. Tincher go back to HUD and, in view of a denial by Council to accept a program, that he attempt to negotiate an acceptable program. Mayor Jackman proposed the motion to read: That the Council reject the con- ditions in which HUD has presented its proposal or requirements, and to give Mr., Tincher the opportunity to discuss this with HUD; that if they can change their conditions in any way, then the Council might look more favorably on it; but if they cannot, then tell them the Council rejects it completely. The wording of the amended motion was agreeab]:e to the Council and passed by unanimous vote. Mr. Tincher then addressed the Council regarding acquisition of a parcel on the Nance street site. The question involves price. Mayor Jackman recessed the meeting to executive session from 7:35 p.m, to 7:40 p.m. to discuss litigation. The meeting resumed with all Council Members present. It was moved by Councilman Mackaig, seconded by Councilman Swearingen, and passed by unanimous vote to authorize the purchase of parcel 21 on Nance Street. Mr. Tincher discussed an issue involving payment of good will on the Firestone Plaza Aqreement with Republic Development Company. The initial agreement provided that the Commission would absorb the good will cost if it would be a judgment that would result from condemnation proceedings. Mr. Tincher said he asked that Republic absorb the cost. He then referred to a letter, wherein Republic has reason not to proceed with the project on the basis reflected in the letter. The good will in question would amount to $58,000. Discussion followed regarding possible condemnation of two parcels of land, excluding the owner's dwellings. Mayor Jackman would like Mr. Tincher to talk with Mr. Don Wilson, attorney, regarding an offer to Republic Development Company. The meeting was then adjourned at 8:53 p.m. - Tda Robert L. Shand, City Clerk -Treasurer Council Minutes 9/29/80 (adj.) -4-